DOCSLIB.ORG

STATE of the RIVER REPORT for the LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER BASIN: Water Quality, Fisheries, Aquatic Life, and Contaminants Page 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
STATE of the RIVER REPORT for the LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER BASIN: Water Quality, Fisheries, Aquatic Life, and Contaminants Page 1 SSTATE OF THE RRIVER RREPORT FOR THE LLOWER SST.. JJOHNS RRIVER BBASIN,, FFLORIDA:: WWATER QQUALITY,, FFISHERIES,, AAQUATIC LLIFE,, && CCONTAMINANTS 22000088 Prepared for Environmental Protection Board City of Jacksonville, Florida St. James Building 117 West Duval Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202 By University of North Florida Jacksonville University 1 UNF Drive and 2800 University Boulevard North Jacksonville, Florida 32224 Jacksonville, Florida 32211 August 4, 2008 LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER REPORT August 4, 2008 STATE OF THE RIVER REPORT FOR THE LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER BASIN: Water Quality, Fisheries, Aquatic Life, and Contaminants Page 1. BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Introduction to the River Report ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1.1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2. Goals and Objectives.................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.3. River Health Indicators and Evaluation............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. St. Johns River Basin Landscape ................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1. Geopolitical Boundaries ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.2. Existing Land Uses........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.2.3. Ecological Zones ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.2.4. Unique Physical Features .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.3. Human Occupancy of the Region (pre­1800s)......................................................................................................... 9 1.3.1. Native Americans.......................................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.3.2. Europeans ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 1.4. Early Environmental Management (1800s to 1970s)........................................................................................... 9 1.5. Modern Environmental Management (1980s to 2000s) ...................................................................................11 2. WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................................................................16 2.1. Overview .............................................................................................................................................................................16 2.2. Dissolved Oxygen................................................................................................................................................................17 2.2.1. Description and Significance: DO and BOD......................................................................................................................17 2.2.2. Factors that Affect DO and BOD............................................................................................................................................18 2.2.3. Data Sources..................................................................................................................................................................................18 2.2.4. Limitations.....................................................................................................................................................................................18 2.2.5. Current Status and Trends......................................................................................................................................................18 2.2.6. Future Outlook.............................................................................................................................................................................23 2.3. Nutrients .............................................................................................................................................................................23 2.3.1. Description and Significance: Phosphorus.......................................................................................................................23 2.3.2. Description and Significance: Nitrogen .............................................................................................................................24 2.3.3. Data Sources..................................................................................................................................................................................24 2.3.4. Limitations.....................................................................................................................................................................................25 2.3.5. Current Status and Trends: Phosphorus...........................................................................................................................25 2.3.6. Current Status and Trends: Nitrogen .................................................................................................................................28 2.3.7. Future Outlook.............................................................................................................................................................................33 2.4. Turbidity .............................................................................................................................................................................33 2.4.1. Description and Significance:.................................................................................................................................................33 2.4.2. Data Sources..................................................................................................................................................................................36 2.4.3. Limitations.....................................................................................................................................................................................36 2.4.4. Current Conditions.....................................................................................................................................................................37 2.4.5. Trend and Future Outlook.......................................................................................................................................................37 2.4.6. Recommendation........................................................................................................................................................................37 2.5. Algal Blooms ......................................................................................................................................................................37 2.5.1. Description and Significance..................................................................................................................................................37 2.5.2. Limitations.....................................................................................................................................................................................41 2.5.3. Current Conditions.....................................................................................................................................................................41 2.5.4. Trend................................................................................................................................................................................................41 2.5.5. Future Outlook.............................................................................................................................................................................41 2.5.6. Recommendations......................................................................................................................................................................41 2.6. Bacteria (Fecal Coliform)..............................................................................................................................................41 2.6.1. Description and Significance..................................................................................................................................................41 i LOWER ST. JOHNS RIVER REPORT August 4,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources
    Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources Everglades National Park was created primarily because of its unique flora and fauna. In the 1920s and 1930s there was some limited understanding that the park might contain significant prehistoric archeological resources, but the area had not been comprehensively surveyed. After establishment, the park’s first superintendent and the NPS regional archeologist were surprised at the number and potential importance of archeological sites. NPS investigations of the park’s archeological resources began in 1949. They continued off and on until a more comprehensive three-year survey was conducted by the NPS Southeast Archeological Center (SEAC) in the early 1980s. The park had few structures from the historic period in 1947, and none was considered of any historical significance. Although the NPS recognized the importance of the work of the Florida Federation of Women’s Clubs in establishing and maintaining Royal Palm State Park, it saw no reason to preserve any physical reminders of that work. Archeological Investigations in Everglades National Park The archeological riches of the Ten Thousand Islands area were hinted at by Ber- nard Romans, a British engineer who surveyed the Florida coast in the 1770s. Romans noted: [W]e meet with innumerable small islands and several fresh streams: the land in general is drowned mangrove swamp. On the banks of these streams we meet with some hills of rich soil, and on every one of those the evident marks of their having formerly been cultivated by the savages.812 Little additional information on sites of aboriginal occupation was available until the late nineteenth century when South Florida became more accessible and better known to outsiders.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons GIS Center GIS Center 5-4-2015 Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H. Richards Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, [email protected] Daniel Gann GIS-RS Center, Florida International University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis Recommended Citation Richards, Jennifer H. and Gann, Daniel, "Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park" (2015). GIS Center. 29. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis/29 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the GIS Center at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GIS Center by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Final Report for VEGETATION TRENDS IN INDICATOR REGIONS OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK Task Agreement No. P12AC50201 Cooperative Agreement No. H5000-06-0104 Host University No. H5000-10-5040 Date of Report: Feb. 12, 2015 Principle Investigator: Jennifer H. Richards Dept. of Biological Sciences Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-3102 (phone), 305-348-1986 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Co-Principle Investigator: Daniel Gann FIU GIS/RS Center Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-1971 (phone), 305-348-6445 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Park Representative: Jimi Sadle, Botanist Everglades National Park 40001 SR 9336 Homestead, FL 33030 305-242-7806 (phone), 305-242-7836 (Fax) FIU Administrative Contact: Susie Escorcia Division of Sponsored Research 11200 SW 8th St. – MARC 430 Miami, FL 33199 305-348-2494 (phone), 305-348-6087 (FAX) 2 Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Just the Facts: North Fork of the St. Lucie River Water Reservation
    North Fork of St. Lucie River, page 1 April 2015 North Fork of the St. Lucie River Water Reservation The joint state-federal Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) identifies restoration of the Indian River Lagoon – South as an integral step in achieving systemwide benefits in the south Florida ecosystem. Subject to extreme salinity variations, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon together are home to more just the than 50 endangered or threatened species. Restoring a more natural volume, timing and FA CTs distribution of flows to the river, floodplain and estuary will give native plant and animal life a better opportunity for recovery. This fact sheet is provided as a The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 required the South Florida reference to encourage a greater Water Management District to legally protect water intended for the natural system understanding of the various before any federal funding could be authorized to construct the CERP Indian River issues related to managing Lagoon – South project. The District adopted a water reservation rule for the North water in South Florida. Fork of the St. Lucie River, and construction is underway on the C-44 Reservoir and Stormwater Treatment Area components. Defining water reservations • A water reservation is a legal mechanism to set aside water for the protection of fish and wildlife or public health and safety. When a water reservation is in place, quantities and timing of water flows at specific locations are protected for the natural system. The necessary quantities and timing are determined using data which link local hydrology to the needs of fish and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Plan for Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Tributaries (EPKOET)
    Environmental Plan for Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Tributaries (EPKOET) Stephanie Bazan, Larissa Gaul, Vanessa Huber, Nicole Paladino, Emily Tulsky April 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY…………………...………………………………………..4 2. MISSION STATEMENT…………………………………....…………………………………7 3. GOVERNANCE……………………………………………………………………...………...8 4. FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL POLICIES…………………………………………..…..10 5. PROBLEMS AND GOALS…..……………………………………………………………....12 6. SCHEDULE…………………………………....……………………………………………...17 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………....17 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………..……………………....18 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure A. Map of the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Watershed…………………………...4 Figure B. Phosphorus levels surrounding the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Watershed…..5 Figure C. Before and after backfilling of the Kissimmee river C-38 canal……………………….6 Figure D. Algae bloom along the St. Lucie River………………………………………………...7 Figure E. Florida’s Five Water Management Districts………………………………………........8 Figure F. Three main aquifer systems in southern Florida……………………………………....14 Figure G. Effect of levees on the watershed………………………………………...…………...15 Figure H. Algal bloom in the KOE watershed…………………………………………...………15 Figure I: Canal systems south of Lake Okeechobee……………………………………………..16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Primary Problems in the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades watershed……………...13 Table 2: Schedule for EPKOET……………………………………………………………….…18 3 1. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades watershed is an area of about
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Communities Trust Annual Report 2016-2017
    Florida Communities Trust Annual Report Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Office of Operations Land and Recreation Grants Section Florida Department of Environmental Protection September 30, 2017 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS 103 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 www.dep.state.fl.us Florida Communities Trust Annual Report Fiscal Year 2016-2017 1 Table of Contents LETTER FROM THE CHAIR ....................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP ........................................................................................................ 2 FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST .............................................................................................. 3 MISSION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS ......................................................................................... 4 PARK HAPPENINGS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 ................................................................ 8 ACQUIRED PROJECTS BY COUNTY 1991-2017 .................................................................... 12 SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES ................................................................................... 29 FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST BOARD MEMBERS ............................................................ 31 Front Cover Photo: Victory Pointe Park (f.k.a. West Lake Park) Unique Abilities 2017 Cycle FCT # 16-005-UA17, City of Clermont, FL Back Cover Photo: Myers-Stickel Property Unique Abilities 2017 Cycle FCT # 16-012-UA17, St. Lucie County, FL Florida Communities Trust
    [Show full text]
  • State-Designated Paddling Trails Paddling Guides
    State-Designated Paddling Trails Paddling Guides Compiled from (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/gwt/guide/paddle.htm) This paddling guide can be downloaded at http://www.naturalnorthflorida.com/download-center/ Last updated March 16, 2016 The Original Florida Tourism Task Force 2009 NW 67th Place Gainesville, FL 32653-1603 352.955.2200 ∙ 877.955.2199 Table of Contents Chapter Page Florida’s Designated Paddling Trails 1 Aucilla River 3 Ichetucknee River 9 Lower Ochlockonee River 13 Santa Fe River 23 Sopchoppy River 29 Steinhatchee River 39 Wacissa River 43 Wakulla River 53 Withlacoochee River North 61 i ii Florida’s Designated Paddling Trails From spring-fed rivers to county blueway networks to the 1515-mile Florida Circumnavigational Saltwater Paddling Trail, Florida is endowed with exceptional paddling trails, rich in wildlife and scenic beauty. If you want to explore one or more of the designated trails, please read through the following descriptions, click on a specific trail on our main paddling trail page for detailed information, and begin your adventure! The following maps and descriptions were compiled from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Office of Greenways and Trails. It was last updated on March 16, 2016. While we strive to keep our information current, the most up-to-date versions are available on the OGT website: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/gwt/guide/paddle.htm The first Florida paddling trails were designated in the early 1970s, and trails have been added to the list ever since. Total mileage for the state-designated trails is now around 4,000 miles.
    [Show full text]
  • FLORIDA STATE PARKS FEE SCHEDULE (Fees Are Per Day Unless Otherwise Noted) 1. Statewide Fees Admission Range $1.00**
    FLORIDA STATE PARKS FEE SCHEDULE (Fees are per day unless otherwise noted) 1. Statewide Fees Admission Range $1.00** - $10.00** (Does not include buses or admission to Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park or Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) Single-Occupant Vehicle or Motorcycle Admission $4.00 - $6.00** (Includes motorcycles with one or more riders and vehicles with one occupant) Per Vehicle Admission $5.00 - $10.00** (Allows admission for 2 to 8 people per vehicle; over 8 people requires additional per person fees) Pedestrians, Bicyclists, Per Passenger Exceeding 8 Per Vehicle; Per $2.00 - $5.00** Passenger In Vehicles With Holder of Annual Individual Entrance Pass Admission Economically Disadvantaged Admission One-half of base (Must be Florida resident admission fee** and currently participating in Food Stamp Program) Bus Tour Admission $2.00** per person (Does not include Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park, or $60.00 Skyway Fishing Pier State Park, or Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) whichever is less Honor Park Admission Per Vehicle $2.00 - $10.00** Pedestrians and Bicyclists $2.00 - $5.00** Sunset Admission $4.00 - $10.00** (Per vehicle, one hour before closing) Florida National Guard Admission One-half of base (Active members, spouses, and minor children; validation required) admission fee** Children, under 6 years of age Free (All parks) Annual Entrance Pass Fee Range $20.00 - $500.00 Individual Annual Entrance Pass $60.00 (Retired U. S. military, honorably discharged veterans, active-duty $45.00 U. S. military and reservists; validation required) Family Annual Entrance Pass $120.00 (maximum of 8 people in a group; only allows up to 2 people at Ellie Schiller Homosassa Springs Wildlife State Park and Weeki Wachee Springs State Park) (Retired U.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida State Parks Data by 2021 House District
    30, Florida State Parks FY 2019-20 Data by 2021 House Districts This compilation was produced by the Florida State Parks Foundation . FloridaStateParksFoundation.org Statewide Totals • 175 Florida State Parks and Trails (164 Parks / 11 Trails) comprising nearly 800,000 Acres • $2.2 billion direct impact to Florida’s economy • $150 million in sales tax revenue • 31,810 jobs supported • 25 million visitors served # of Economic Jobs Park House Districts Parks Impact Supported Visitors 1 Salzman, Michelle 0 2 Andrade, Robert Alexander “Alex” 3 31,073,188 436 349,462 Big Lagoon State Park 10,336,536 145 110,254 Perdido Key State Park 17,191,206 241 198,276 Tarklin Bayou Preserve State Park 3,545,446 50 40,932 3 Williamson, Jayer 3 26,651,285 416 362,492 Blackwater Heritage State Trail 18,971,114 266 218,287 Blackwater River State Park 7,101,563 99 78,680 Yellow River Marsh Preserve State Park 578,608 51 65,525 4 Maney, Thomas Patterson “Patt” 2 41,626,278 583 469,477 Fred Gannon Rocky Bayou State Park 7,558,966 106 83,636 Henderson Beach State Park 34,067,312 477 385,841 5 Drake, Brad 9 64,140,859 897 696,022 Camp Helen State Park 3,133,710 44 32,773 Deer Lake State Park 1,738,073 24 19,557 Eden Gardens State Park 3,235,182 45 36,128 Falling Waters State Park 5,510,029 77 58,866 Florida Caverns State Park 4,090,576 57 39,405 Grayton Beach State Park 17,072,108 239 186,686 Ponce de Leon Springs State Park 6,911,495 97 78,277 Three Rivers State Park 2,916,005 41 30,637 Topsail Hill Preserve State Park 19,533,681 273 213,693 6 Trumbull, Jay 2 45,103,015 632 504,860 Camp Helen State Park 3,133,710 44 32,773 St.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 78, No. 30/Wednesday, February 13, 2013
    10072 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2013 / Rules and Regulations * Elevation in feet (NGVD) + Elevation in feet (NAVD) # Depth in feet Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation above ground Communities affected ∧ Elevation in me- ters (MSL) modified Polecat Branch ......................... At the confluence with Maple Creek ................................... +112 Unincorporated Areas of Nash County. Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with +120 Polecat Branch Tributary. Sapony Creek ........................... Approximately 200 feet upstream of Sandy Cross Road +132 Unincorporated Areas of (Secondary Road 1717). Nash County. Approximately 1,550 feet upstream of NC Highway 58 ..... +145 Stony Creek .............................. Approximately 0.5 mile downstream of Red Oak Road +130 City of Rocky Mount, Town (Secondary Road 1003). of Nashville. Just upstream of U.S. Route 64 ......................................... +152 Swift Creek ............................... Approximately 1.8 miles downstream of the Edgecombe +88 City of Rocky Mount, Unin- County boundary. corporated Areas of Nash County. At Red Oak Road (Secondary Road 1003) ........................ +131 Tar River ................................... Approximately 150 feet downstream of South Old Car- +133 City of Rocky Mount, Unin- riage Road. corporated Areas of Nash County. Approximately 0.64 mile downstream of U.S. Highway 64 +162 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. + North American Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. ∧ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter. ADDRESSES City of Rocky Mount Maps are available for inspection at the Planning Department, 331 South Franklin Street, Rocky Mount, NC 27802. Town of Nashville Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 499 South Barnes Street, Nashville, NC 27856. Town of Red Oak Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 8406 Main Street, Red Oak, NC 27868.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Johns River, Florida
    ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY INDEX: ST. JOHNS RIVER, FLORIDA INTRODUCTION SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps have been developed A wetland and aquatic ecologist with Research Planning, Inc. (RPI) for the St. Johns River, from Jacksonville south (upstream) to Sanford, collected and compiled the biological information presented on the Florida. The section of river from Jacksonville to the river mouth at maps with the assistance of state and regional biologists and resource Mayport was published in digital and hardcopy format as part of the managers from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission East Florida ESI atlas (1996). Six maps from East Florida are included (FGFWFC), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in this hardcopy atlas to provide coverage of the lower river to the (FDEP), and other agencies and organizations. Digital point data for ocean (maps #1-6). However, no new data and no edits have been various resource groups were provided by FGFWFC and the Florida incorporated for these six maps. The St. Johns River ESI maps include Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). Digital data for wetland and information for three main components: shoreline and wetland aquatic habitat types, and other land-use/land-cover features, were habitats; sensitive biological resources; and human-use resources. provided by SJRWMD. Information collected and depicted on the maps Background information, as well as the methods of data collection and denotes the key biological resources that are most likely at risk in the presentation, are summarized in the following sections. event of an oil spill. Seven major categories of biological resources were considered during production of the maps: marine mammals, terrestrial mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, fish, shellfish, and SHORELINE AND WETLAND HABITAT MAPPING habitats/rare plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades to Okeefenokee – a Thousand Miles Through the Heart of Florida
    FLORIDA WILDLIFE CORRIDOR EXPEDITION: EVERGLADES TO OKEEFENOKEE – A THOUSAND MILES THROUGH THE HEART OF FLORIDA The vision of the Florida Wildlife Corridor is to connect natural lands and waters throughout peninsular Florida, from the Everglades to Okeefenokee in southeast Georgia. Despite extensive fragmentation of the landscape in recent decades, a statewide network of connected natural areas is still possible. The first step is raising awareness about the fleeting opportunity we have to connect natural and rural landscapes in order to protect the waters that sustain us, the working farms and ranches that feed us, the forests that clean our air, and the combined habitat these lands provide for Florida’s diverse wildlife, including panthers and black bears. Our goal is to increase public awareness for the Corridor idea through a broad-reaching media campaign, with the Florida Wildlife Corridor Expedition as the center of the outreach strategy. January 17, 2012 marks the kick off the 1000 mile expedition over a 100 day period to increase public awareness and generate support for the Florida Wildlife Corridor. Photographer Carlton Ward Jr, bear biologist Joe Guthrie, conservationist Mallory Lykes Dimmitt and filmmaker Elam Stoltzfus will trek from the Everglades National Park toward Okefenokee National Forest in southern Georgia. They will traverse the wildlife FLORIDA WILDLIFE habitats, watersheds and participating working farms and ranches, which comprise CORRIDOR the Florida Wildlife Corridor opportunity area. KEY ISSUES: The team will document the corridor through photography, video, radio reports, • Protecting and restoring dispersal and daily updates on social media networks, and a host of activities for reporters, migration corridors essential for the landowners, celebrities, conservationists, politicians and other guests.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades Ecosystem Assessment: Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat
    United States Region 4 Science & Ecosystem EPA 904-R-07-001 Environmental Protection Support Division and Water August 2007 Agency Management Division EPA Everglades Ecosystem Assessment: Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat Monitoring for Adaptive Management: A R-EMAP Status Report The Everglades Ecosystem Assessment Program is being conducted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division, with the Region 4 Water Management Division cooperating. Many entities have contributed to this Program, including the National Park Service, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida International University, University of Georgia, Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory, FTN Associates Incorporated, United States Geological Survey, South Florida Water Management District, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida and the Seminole Tribe of Indians allowed sampling to take place on their federal reservations within the Everglades. EPA 904-R-07-001 August 2007 EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat Monitoring for Adaptive Management A R-EMAP Status Report U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division Athens, Georgia This document is available on the Internet for browsing or download at: <http://www.epa.gov/region4/sesd/sesdpub_completed.html> Everglades R-EMAP is a program of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Region 4 Laboratory [the Science and Ecosystem Support Division (SESD) in Athens, Georgia], with the Region 4 Water Management Division (WMD) cooperating. Everglades R-EMAP is managed by Peter Kalla of SESD.
    [Show full text]